The personal blog of Peter Lee a.k.a. "China Hand"... Life is a comedy to those who think, a tragedy to those who feel, and an open book to those who read. You are welcome to contact China Matters at the address chinamatters --a-- prlee.org or follow me on twitter @chinahand.

Friday, September 12, 2014

With IS, US Getting Ready for Its “Suez Crisis” Post-Imperial Close-Up

Though an
anti-war type I am not on the same page with many anti-war types when it comes
to poo-pooing President Obama’s call for military action against the IS
caliphate.

The caliphate is a big deal, in my opinion, a big bad transnational
deal with significant consequences throughout Asia, and something should be
done.“Something”, unfortunately, would
be a big, disruptive military campaign coordinated through the UN Security Council and Arab League, spearheaded by Saudi Arabia and Turkey,
and involving lots of Saudi and Turkish casualties, both military and civilian,
and a prolonged, agonizing, and expensive effort to reassert the control of the
Iraqi and Syrian governments over the territory they had lost.

Understandably, nobody, including the United States, is
willing or able to make sure that something actually gets done and it looks
like what we are getting is a collection of ineffectual half-measures justified
by hyped-up “threat to the homeland” agitation whose main purpose is to exploit
the crISis in order to enhance US clout in the region.

IS took root in Iraq and Syria, in large part because of the
Obama administration’s willingness to enable a jihadi solution to its
dump-Assad problem and the very, very bad decision of Turkey and Saudi Arabia
to support the operation. I don’t think
President Obama and his foreign policy team should be judged generously for
their casual “let ‘er drift” casual approach to the dangerous and unpredictable
mechanics of regime collapse through jihadi insurgency, with the details
handled by two rather incompetent local allies who claim to be regional powers
but are actually risk averse opportunists who look to the United States to do all the heavy lifting.

The depressing part of the US strategy is that, as far as I
can tell, it views the anti-IS campaign as a Trojan Horse, a chance to favor,
strengthen, and advance anti-Assad forces.So instead of cooperating with literally the only Middle Eastern state
willing to field an army against IS—Syria—the US is refusing to work with Syria
and instead will train and equip an anti-Assad and anti-IS force, reportedly in
Saudi Arabia, that is less of a US-backed militia of venal “insurgents” and
more of a controlled and disciplined military strike force created, controlled,
and deployed by the CIA and, unlike our most famous previous experiment in this
vein, the Bay of Pigs invasion, this force will have lots and lots of airpower.

The idea, presumably, is that as IS is pummeled by drones
and air strikes (and its fleet of tanker trucks ferrying crude oil to Turkey is
destroyed) and retreats, the US-backed force will advance and occupy the
vacated territories before Assad can.And hopefully, the force will attract the fairweather allies of IS who
prefer a US paycheck and immunity from air strikes to getting plastered.And then the US can orchestrate demands from
a finally viable Syrian opposition for Assad to step down in the name of
national unity, full US support, and an all-out war against IS.Victory!

My admittedly imperfect knowledge of US government decision
making implies to me that somebody had to bring President Obama a proposal like
this for an American win in Syria—or at least a borderline plausible case for a
chance for an American win in Syria--before he made the politically unpalatable
decision to re-enter the Middle East quagmire.

Assad, Russia, and IS are, of course, not going to stand idly by as this
clever plan is implemented.My
prediction is that the US will experience its usual success in the
counterinsurgency nuts and bolts of “clearing” territory, and its usual
difficulty in the complicated political task of “holding” territory.So my expectation is for several more years
of inconclusive and expensive bloodshed as the people of Syria and Iraq suffer
through (and the US security/military/think tank complex profit from) another overoptimistic US geostrategic experiment.

I think the spectacle of the US dilemma in the Middle East will also spur the PRC to adopt a massively-preemptive hard line against Islamist militancy in Xinjiang. China, after all, considers itself an empire on the rise and with the will and resources to go toe to toe with its political enemies, not waiting, US-style, for disaster to pound at the door before thinking about doing something.

If things heat up in west China with blame being attached to jihadi havens in Pakistan, Afghanistan, or wherever, don't be too surprised if the PRC embarks on its own regional military adventure, probably through the Shanghai Cooperation Organization of Asian states (the PRC recently hosted a big anti-terrorist military drill for SCO forces) but unilaterally if need be. And if the PRC chooses the military option, don't expect half-measures. If a region in Xinjiang shows promise of becoming a stronghold of anti-PRC sentiment, the regime will pave it over before it allows a IS-style force to establish itself.

And now, since I am somewhat pressed for time, I will
outsource the rest of my points to my cut-and-pasted Twitter feed with edits
for clarity and one extended observation:

Westerners mock pretensions of IS
Caliphate but it seems to strike chord among quite a few Muslims: effort to
reestablish theocratic rule in heartland of Umayyad/Abbasid caliphates, turn
page on disastrous century of colonial/postcolonial rule, replace
fragmented/corrupt states w/ united Islamic power. The West’s passivity
validates the caliphate & its transnational strategy. May be it will be PRC/Russia
that try to draw the line.

Ending IS & restoring control of
its territories to functioning Syrian/Iraqi governments would require a
military/political upheaval beyond will/capability of US/"allies".
IMO this is the real "British @ Suez crisis" limits-of-empire event.
Expect US experts already talking about how to degrade/coerce/manage/moderate/engage
IS regime we can’t destroy. Good ol' Saudi Arabia waiting to offer its good
offices I'm sure.In PRC, Chinese government
will adopt extremely harsh & intensive methods in Xinjiang to pre-empt
similar crisis of control IMO

If as I believe PRC determined not
to repeat us mistake in letting IS take root, its first order of business may
be alliance w/ Mullah Omar in Afghanistan.

[The Afghan Taliban, as opposed to
the Pakistan Taliban, has maintained a modus vivendi with the PRC and not
seriously threatened PRC interests in Pakistan and Xinjiang. Proclamation of the IS Caliphate is a direct
challenge to Mullah Omar’s emirship in Afghanistan and various Islamist
militant organizations in South Asia are fracturing as a result.In this case, I think Mullah Omar and the PRC
will look at each other as “friends in need” when it comes to countering the IS
push into Pakistan (ongoing) and Afghanistan (only a matter of time)].

Should look at Sri Lanka anti-Tamil
campaign for example of what happens when PRC gets serious abt
counterinsurgency.Everybody wanted
Tamils crushed but quailed at humanitarian cost. So PRC helped Sri Lankan gvt
do the dirty work & let West handle post-hoc human rights handwringing. An
ugly affair, & one of the few successful CI ops post-WWII.